## Bava Kamma Daf 76b

###### Bava Kamma 76b:1
[Bava Kamma 76b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:1)

וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: בְּשׁוֹחֵט בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין בַּחוּץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Reish Lakish says** yet another explanation as to why the principal has not been returned to the owner: This is referring to a case **where** the thief **slaughters blemished** animals **outside** the Temple. A blemished animal may be slaughtered outside the Temple and its meat may be eaten, provided that it is redeemed with money.


###### Bava Kamma 76b:2
[Bava Kamma 76b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:2)

תָּהֵי בַּהּ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן – שְׁחִיטָה מַתֶּרֶת?! וַהֲלֹא זְרִיקָה מַתֶּרֶת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Elazar wondered about this** discussion: **According to** the explanations attributed to **Rabbi Yoḥanan,** which are based on the assumption that this is referring to slaughtering a sacrificial animal inside the Temple, is it the **slaughtering** of the animal that **renders** it **permitted** for consumption? **But isn’t it** the **sprinkling** of the blood that **renders** it **permitted?** It is prohibited to eat sacrificial meat immediately after the slaughter; only after the sprinkling of the blood is it permitted to consume the meat. As the slaughter itself does not render the animal’s meat permitted, there should be no liability to pay the fourfold or fivefold payment.


###### Bava Kamma 76b:3
[Bava Kamma 76b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:3)

לְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ – שְׁחִיטָה מַתֶּרֶת?! וַהֲלֹא פְּדִיָּיה מַתֶּרֶת!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Elazar continues: And **according to** the explanation of **Reish Lakish,** who states that the case is referring to the slaughter of a consecrated blemished animal outside the Temple, is it the **slaughtering** of the animal that **renders** it **permitted** for consumption? **But isn’t it** the **redemption** of the animal that **renders** it **permitted?** Since the thief slaughtered a sacrificial animal, it is prohibited to eat its meat until its sanctity is removed by redeeming it with money. Once again, the slaughter itself does not render the meat permitted, and here too, there should be no liability to pay the fourfold or fivefold payment.


###### Bava Kamma 76b:4
[Bava Kamma 76b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:4)

אִישְׁתְּמִיטְתֵּיהּ הָא דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: כׇּל הָעוֹמֵד לִזְרוֹק – כְּזָרוּק דָּמֵי, וְכׇל הָעוֹמֵד לִפְדּוֹת – כְּפָדוּי דָּמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: Apparently, **this** following statement **of Rabbi Shimon escaped** Rabbi Elazar, who asked these questions. Rabbi Shimon holds that **any** blood **that is ready to be sprinkled is considered** as though it had already been **sprinkled, and** likewise, **any** animal **that is ready to be redeemed is considered** as if it had already been **redeemed.**


###### Bava Kamma 76b:5
[Bava Kamma 76b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:5)

כׇּל הָעוֹמֵד לִזְרוֹק כְּזָרוּק דָּמֵי – דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: יֵשׁ נוֹתָר שֶׁהוּא מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין, וְיֵשׁ נוֹתָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara proves that Rabbi Shimon maintains these two opinions. Rabbi Shimon holds that **any** blood **that is ready to be sprinkled is considered** as though it had already been **sprinkled, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon says: There are** cases involving **leftover** sacrificial meat **after the time allotted for its consumption [*notar*],** in **which** the meat is susceptible to **contracting ritual impurity of food, and there are** cases of **leftover** sacrificial meat in which the meat **is not** susceptible to **contracting ritual impurity of food.**


###### Bava Kamma 76b:6
[Bava Kamma 76b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:6)

כֵּיצַד? לָן לִפְנֵי זְרִיקָה – אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין. לְאַחַר זְרִיקָה – מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**How so?** If sacrificial meat was disqualified due to the fact that it **remained overnight,** i.e., after the allotted time for that offering, **before** the **sprinkling** of its blood, it **is not** susceptible to **contracting ritual impurity of food,** as it was never fit for consumption. According to Rabbi Shimon, for an item to be susceptible to contracting ritual impurity of food it must have been permitted for consumption or benefit, either at present or at some point in the past. Sacrificial meat may not be consumed before the sprinkling of its blood, nor may it be consumed if it had been left over after a specific period of time, in most cases overnight. If it was disqualified by being left overnight before its blood had been sprinkled, there was never a time when the meat was permitted. By contrast, if the meat was disqualified by being left over **after** the **sprinkling** of the blood, it **is** susceptible to **contracting ritual impurity of food,** as it was permitted for consumption at some point after the sprinkling of the blood.


###### Bava Kamma 76b:7
[Bava Kamma 76b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:7)

וְקַיְימָא לַן: מַאי ״לִפְנֵי זְרִיקָה״ – קוֹדֶם שֶׁנִּרְאָה לִזְרִיקָה. ״לְאַחַר זְרִיקָה״ – לְאַחַר שֶׁנִּרְאָה לִזְרִיקָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And we maintain,** as a result of a discussion recorded in tractate *Menaḥot* (101b): **What** is the meaning of: **Before** the **sprinkling** of the blood? It means **before** the blood **became fit for sprinkling.** And what is meant by: **After** the **sprinkling** of the blood? This means **after** the blood **became fit for sprinkling,** i.e., immediately subsequent to the slaughter.


###### Bava Kamma 76b:8
[Bava Kamma 76b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:8)

קוֹדֶם שֶׁנִּרְאָה לִזְרִיקָה לָן – מַאי הִיא? דְּלָא הָוְיָא שְׁהוּת בַּיּוֹם לְמִזְרְקֵיהּ, דְּשַׁחְטֵיהּ סָמוּךְ לִשְׁקִיעַת הַחַמָּה – וְאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **What is** the case in which the meat **remained overnight before** the blood **became fit for sprinkling?** Since the blood is fit for sprinkling almost immediately after the animal’s slaughter, how is it possible for the meat to become *notar* before that stage? The Gemara answers: This is referring to a case **where there was not enough time in the day to sprinkle** the blood, **as he slaughtered** the offering **immediately prior to sunset.** The blood was never fit for sprinkling, as the act of sprinkling must be performed before sunset. **And** in this case the meat is **not** susceptible to **contracting ritual impurity of food,** as there was never a time when it was permitted for consumption.


###### Bava Kamma 76b:9
[Bava Kamma 76b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:9)

לְאַחַר שֶׁנִּרְאָה לִזְרִיקָה לָן, דַּהֲוַיא שְׁהוּת בַּיּוֹם לְמִזְרְקֵיהּ – מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת אוֹכָלִין. אַלְמָא כָּל הָעוֹמֵד לִזְרוֹק – כְּזָרוּק דָּמֵי,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
What is the case where the meat **remained overnight after** the blood **became fit for sprinkling?** It was **when there was** enough **time** remaining **in the day** after the slaughter **to sprinkle** the blood, and therefore the meat **is** susceptible to **contracting ritual impurity of food.** The Gemara states its conclusion: **Evidently,** Rabbi Shimon maintains that **any** blood **that is ready to be sprinkled is considered** as though it had already been **sprinkled.**


###### Bava Kamma 76b:10
[Bava Kamma 76b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Bava%20Kamma/r/76b:10)

וְכׇל הָעוֹמֵד לִפְדּוֹת – כְּפָדוּי דָּמֵי. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** Rabbi Shimon holds that **any** animal **that is ready to be redeemed is considered** as though it is already **redeemed, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Shimon says:**